You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2003 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(33) |
Dec
(20) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 |
Jan
(7) |
Feb
(44) |
Mar
(51) |
Apr
(43) |
May
(43) |
Jun
(36) |
Jul
(61) |
Aug
(44) |
Sep
(25) |
Oct
(82) |
Nov
(97) |
Dec
(47) |
| 2005 |
Jan
(77) |
Feb
(143) |
Mar
(42) |
Apr
(31) |
May
(93) |
Jun
(93) |
Jul
(35) |
Aug
(78) |
Sep
(56) |
Oct
(44) |
Nov
(72) |
Dec
(75) |
| 2006 |
Jan
(116) |
Feb
(99) |
Mar
(181) |
Apr
(171) |
May
(112) |
Jun
(86) |
Jul
(91) |
Aug
(111) |
Sep
(77) |
Oct
(72) |
Nov
(57) |
Dec
(51) |
| 2007 |
Jan
(64) |
Feb
(116) |
Mar
(70) |
Apr
(74) |
May
(53) |
Jun
(40) |
Jul
(519) |
Aug
(151) |
Sep
(132) |
Oct
(74) |
Nov
(282) |
Dec
(190) |
| 2008 |
Jan
(141) |
Feb
(67) |
Mar
(69) |
Apr
(96) |
May
(227) |
Jun
(404) |
Jul
(399) |
Aug
(96) |
Sep
(120) |
Oct
(205) |
Nov
(126) |
Dec
(261) |
| 2009 |
Jan
(136) |
Feb
(136) |
Mar
(119) |
Apr
(124) |
May
(155) |
Jun
(98) |
Jul
(136) |
Aug
(292) |
Sep
(174) |
Oct
(126) |
Nov
(126) |
Dec
(79) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(109) |
Feb
(83) |
Mar
(139) |
Apr
(91) |
May
(79) |
Jun
(164) |
Jul
(184) |
Aug
(146) |
Sep
(163) |
Oct
(128) |
Nov
(70) |
Dec
(73) |
| 2011 |
Jan
(235) |
Feb
(165) |
Mar
(147) |
Apr
(86) |
May
(74) |
Jun
(118) |
Jul
(65) |
Aug
(75) |
Sep
(162) |
Oct
(94) |
Nov
(48) |
Dec
(44) |
| 2012 |
Jan
(49) |
Feb
(40) |
Mar
(88) |
Apr
(35) |
May
(52) |
Jun
(69) |
Jul
(90) |
Aug
(123) |
Sep
(112) |
Oct
(120) |
Nov
(105) |
Dec
(116) |
| 2013 |
Jan
(76) |
Feb
(26) |
Mar
(78) |
Apr
(43) |
May
(61) |
Jun
(53) |
Jul
(147) |
Aug
(85) |
Sep
(83) |
Oct
(122) |
Nov
(18) |
Dec
(27) |
| 2014 |
Jan
(58) |
Feb
(25) |
Mar
(49) |
Apr
(17) |
May
(29) |
Jun
(39) |
Jul
(53) |
Aug
(52) |
Sep
(35) |
Oct
(47) |
Nov
(110) |
Dec
(27) |
| 2015 |
Jan
(50) |
Feb
(93) |
Mar
(96) |
Apr
(30) |
May
(55) |
Jun
(83) |
Jul
(44) |
Aug
(8) |
Sep
(5) |
Oct
|
Nov
(1) |
Dec
(1) |
| 2016 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(2) |
Jul
|
Aug
(3) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
(3) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2017 |
Jan
|
Feb
(5) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(3) |
Aug
|
Sep
(7) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2018 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
|
3
|
4
(3) |
5
(9) |
6
(3) |
7
(3) |
8
(4) |
9
(7) |
|
10
(2) |
11
(10) |
12
|
13
(1) |
14
(3) |
15
(1) |
16
|
|
17
|
18
(3) |
19
(9) |
20
(24) |
21
(8) |
22
(21) |
23
(2) |
|
24
(1) |
25
(4) |
26
(3) |
27
(6) |
28
(18) |
29
(7) |
30
(3) |
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From: Jae-Joon L. <lee...@gm...> - 2009-05-30 21:39:39
|
Andrew, Another issue. The zorder of the spine artists is set to 0 by default. I notice that you're changing the zorder of its artist attribute, but note that it has no effect as what matter is the zorder of the spine itself. As a related issue to what John mentioned, I think one option you can do is to derive the Spine class itself from a real artist class, rather than the base "Artist". With this, you don't need to implement all other set/get method, e.g., color, etc. For example, you may derive it from the Patch class. Note that while the Patch class is intended for closed path, you can stroke a straight line with it. Regards, -JJ On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 9:18 PM, John Hunter <jd...@gm...> wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Andrew Straw <str...@as...> wrote: >> I've gone ahead and committed my arbitrary spine location implementation >> to the trunk (svn r7144). I'd appreciate it if you could kick the tires. >> To get you started, try the new demo: >> examples/pylab_examples/spine_placement_demo.py > > I just did a quick read through of the spine code and example, and > have two minor comments. > > You do an isinstance(arg, basestring) to check for string input. > Typically, we encourage cbook.is_string_like to have a central point > of maintenance and consistency for these checks. > > Also, in the example, you appear to turn off a spine by setting the > color to 'none'. My thought it would be more natural to use the > "visible" artist property here (or at least support both) > > @allow_rasterization > def draw(self,renderer): > "draw everything that belongs to the spine" > if not self.get_visible() or self.color.lower()=='none' or not > self.color: > # don't draw invisible spines > return > self.artist.draw(renderer) > > Also, I think the class of strings representing "no color" in mpl is > larger -- it should also include self.color.lower()=='none' and the > empty string, which I've included in the example code. > > JDH > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Register Now for Creativity and Technology (CaT), June 3rd, NYC. CaT > is a gathering of tech-side developers & brand creativity professionals. Meet > the minds behind Google Creative Lab, Visual Complexity, Processing, & > iPhoneDevCamp as they present alongside digital heavyweights like Barbarian > Group, R/GA, & Big Spaceship. http://p.sf.net/sfu/creativitycat-com > _______________________________________________ > Matplotlib-devel mailing list > Mat...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel > |
|
From: John H. <jd...@gm...> - 2009-05-30 18:14:33
|
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 9:44 PM, Petr Marhoun <pet...@gm...> wrote: > Hello, > > Few days ago there were new windows binaries on Sourceforge - version > 0.98.5.3. Yesterday I also found them in Google cache (see the > attachment - I am interested mainly in Python 2.6). > > But they are not now on Sourceforge. Is there a good reason for it > (for example there could be problematic)? Or is it a Sourceforge > mistake (I am not sure but I think that design of the Sourceforge > download page was different)? > > Maybe there is another explanation - but if it is possible, could > windows binaries be uploaded again? The 0.98.5.3 binaries have a problem with the PNG output, so I pulled them. Charile, do you still have the 0.98.5.2 win32 binaries to reupload while we are sorting out this problem? JDH |
|
From: Petr M. <pet...@gm...> - 2009-05-30 02:44:41
|
Hello, Few days ago there were new windows binaries on Sourceforge - version 0.98.5.3. Yesterday I also found them in Google cache (see the attachment - I am interested mainly in Python 2.6). But they are not now on Sourceforge. Is there a good reason for it (for example there could be problematic)? Or is it a Sourceforge mistake (I am not sure but I think that design of the Sourceforge download page was different)? Maybe there is another explanation - but if it is possible, could windows binaries be uploaded again? Thank you, Petr Marhoun |